Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>> The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>> within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Watch those goalposts move.
>>>
>>> You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>> like with like, please!
>>
>> We were talking about low profile tyres.
>>
>>>> Not a pilot, but I wouldn't call a freelander roomy given its size and weight.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>> keep pointing out). That's a normal family car. The Freelander's extra
>>> height gives a little more headroom inside (despite the higher floor), I
>>> suspect, and greatly improved visibility of the road.
>>
>> A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom. But
>> yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>
> Actually, less legroom than the Mondeo it was derived from, as it has a
> shorter wheelbase.

Many taller cars have more effective leg room than the saloons they’re
based on, because the seats are higher and the lower leg doesn’t need to be
stretched so far to be comfortable.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>>> The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>>> within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Watch those goalposts move.
>>>>
>>>> You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>>> like with like, please!
>>>
>>> We were talking about low profile tyres.
>>>
>>>>> Not a pilot, but I wouldn't call a freelander roomy given its size and weight.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>>> keep pointing out). That's a normal family car. The Freelander's extra
>>>> height gives a little more headroom inside (despite the higher floor), I
>>>> suspect, and greatly improved visibility of the road.
>>>
>>> A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom. But
>>> yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>>
>> Actually, less legroom than the Mondeo it was derived from, as it has a
>> shorter wheelbase.
>
> Many taller cars have more effective leg room than the saloons they’re
> based on, because the seats are higher and the lower leg doesn’t need to be
> stretched so far to be comfortable.
>

In theory, yes, but I don't know if that model has a higher seat above the
floor than the Mondeo 3? Or is the extra height mainly used up by the much
higher floor?

On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 12:38:27 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t2rpnu$u47$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:13:02 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
>Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t2rf4f$hge$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:11:59 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t2pl9g$4fu$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:44:49 on Fri, 8 Apr 2022,
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <t2hnn3$b2v$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:37:08 on Tue, 5 Apr
>>>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 09:33:10 +0100
>>>>>>>> martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 05/04/2022 04:12, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:50:50 +0100
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <t2ean5$181m$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 08:36:53 on Mon, 4 Apr
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Plus they're all shorter than my very normal estate car, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 110 are shorter or the same as my very normal hatchback.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And much higher.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why does that matter?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Multi story car parks, ferries, eurotunnel, roll over.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Wait but you just suggested getting a Transit as an
>>>>>>>>>>alternative. Which is surely even higher?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not only that but they're notorious for bashing bridges. Can you
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How many bridges are there that a standard transit can't fit under?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Standard ones not, but people put roof-racks on them, or ladders; and
>>>>>>> the second most bashed bridge locally is only 6'6"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Stonea-15-Oct-2019.jpg>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That van isn't going to be replacing the family Discovery, though, is it?
>>>>>
>>>>> We've got diverted down this rathole by the suggestion from someone that
>>>>> white-van-man sometimes buys a Disc, for dual-purpose transport. Not the
>>>>> other way around.
>>>>
>>>> But also simultaneously by Muttley's suggestion that my two non- white van
>>>> man friends, with large families, dog, dodgy country roads, and tow a car
>>>> trailer several times a year, should replace their Disco with a Transit.
>>>
>>> Not sure a regular Transit (rather than one of those with extra seats,
>>> as used for crew buses/vans by Network Rail[) would work for a family.
>>>
>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/jmupton2000/8198485958
>>
>>That's why I mentioned Tourneo.
>>
>><https://www.ford.co.uk/cars/tourneo-custom>
>
>I wonder how it drives? There is(was?) a Mercedes people carrier that's
>basically a van-conversion, and it drove horribly. One of the few test
>drives I've been on where I couldn't wait to get back to the dealer's.

Probably the Vaneo?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_Vaneo>

Probably not the V-Class:
<https://www.carbuyer.co.uk/mercedes/v-class>

But not the new T-Class (based on the Renault Kangoo):
<https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/vans/352858/mercedes-t-class-van-based-mpv-teased-ahead-april-reveal>

On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 12:36:00 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <t2rppn$ufl$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:13:59 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>So the FL2 was a shortened, less roomy, thirstier 3rd generation Mondeo on
>>stilts.
>
>Which is better off-road, or in slippery conditions, and better load
>carrying capacity, than either of those. Why do you project so much FL2
>envy?

Just how often do you use your SUV offroad? I don't mean a country track with
a few potholes that any car beside a ferrari or lambo could navigate without
any issues, I mean genuinely offroad that requires 4wd with proper off road
tyres.

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t2pl9g$4fu$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:44:49 on Fri, 8 Apr 2022,
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t2hnn3$b2v$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:37:08 on Tue, 5 Apr
>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>> On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 09:33:10 +0100
>>>>> martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/04/2022 04:12, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:50:50 +0100
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <t2ean5$181m$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 08:36:53 on Mon, 4 Apr
>>>>>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Plus they're all shorter than my very normal estate car, and
>>>>>>>>>>> all but the
>>>>>>>>>>> 110 are shorter or the same as my very normal hatchback.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And much higher.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why does that matter?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Multi story car parks, ferries, eurotunnel, roll over.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wait but you just suggested getting a Transit as an alternative. Which is
>>>>>>> surely even higher?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not only that but they're notorious for bashing bridges. Can you
>>>>>
>>>>> How many bridges are there that a standard transit can't fit under?
>>>>
>>>> Standard ones not, but people put roof-racks on them, or ladders; and
>>>> the second most bashed bridge locally is only 6'6"
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Stonea-15-Oct-2019.jpg>
>>>
>>> That van isn't going to be replacing the family Discovery, though, is it?
>>
>> We've got diverted down this rathole by the suggestion from someone that
>> white-van-man sometimes buys a Disc, for dual-purpose transport. Not the
>> other way around.
>
> But also simultaneously by Muttley's suggestion that my two non- white van
> man friends, with large families, dog, dodgy country roads, and tow a car
> trailer several times a year, should replace their Disco with a Transit.
>
>
> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>
>

Any Transit Van with a trailer sets off my ,Irish Traveller, Flytipper
,lead roof thief etc alert.
I may downgrade the assumption fairly quickly when evidence points to it
being operated by someone with a hobby such as motorcycle racing or moving
things to an auction ,boot sale,town market etc but its not a combination I
would choose unless there was a specific requirement for it.

GH

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>>>> The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>>>> within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Watch those goalposts move.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>>>> like with like, please!
>>>>
>>>> We were talking about low profile tyres.
>>>>
>>>>>> Not a pilot, but I wouldn't call a freelander roomy given its size and weight.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>>>> keep pointing out). That's a normal family car. The Freelander's extra
>>>>> height gives a little more headroom inside (despite the higher floor), I
>>>>> suspect, and greatly improved visibility of the road.
>>>>
>>>> A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom. But
>>>> yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>>>
>>> Actually, less legroom than the Mondeo it was derived from, as it has a
>>> shorter wheelbase.
>>
>> Many taller cars have more effective leg room than the saloons they’re
>> based on, because the seats are higher and the lower leg doesn’t need to be
>> stretched so far to be comfortable.
>>
>
> In theory, yes, but I don't know if that model has a higher seat above the
> floor than the Mondeo 3? Or is the extra height mainly used up by the much
> higher floor?

I don’t know about that model either, I’ve just noticed it in other cars -
either more legroom or a shorter wheelbase which is just as comfortable. I
first noticed it in the early Mégane Scenics.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <t2rp54$1gb1$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 11:03:00 on Sat, 9 Apr
2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>within the scope of this discussion.
>>>
>>>Watch those goalposts move.
>>
>>You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>like with like, please!
>
>We were talking about low profile tyres.

On the sort of cars someone might buy instead of a Freelander.

>>>Not a pilot, but I wouldn't call a freelander roomy given its size
>>>and weight.
>>
>>It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>keep pointing out). That's a normal family car. The Freelander's extra
>>height gives a little more headroom inside (despite the higher floor), I
>>suspect, and greatly improved visibility of the road.
>
>A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom.

Why do you need "extra" legroom. There's plenty already.

>But yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.

The extra visibility of the road is probably better for people who are
5'6" tall.

--
Roland Perry

In message <t2s005$dbh$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:59:49 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>>> within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Watch those goalposts move.
>>>>
>>>> You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>>> like with like, please!
>>>
>>> We were talking about low profile tyres.
>>>
>>>>> Not a pilot, but I wouldn't call a freelander roomy given its size and weight.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>>> keep pointing out). That's a normal family car. The Freelander's extra
>>>> height gives a little more headroom inside (despite the higher floor), I
>>>> suspect, and greatly improved visibility of the road.
>>>
>>> A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom. But
>>> yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>>
>> Actually, less legroom than the Mondeo it was derived from, as it has a
>> shorter wheelbase.
>
>Many taller cars have more effective leg room than the saloons they’re
>based on, because the seats are higher and the lower leg doesn’t need to be
>stretched so far to be comfortable.

The Freelander also has very deep footwells.

ps There's an implication in wanting "more legroom than a Mondeo" that
the latter is somehow lacking. Is it actually true?

--
Roland Perry

On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 16:06:13 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <t2rp54$1gb1$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 11:03:00 on Sat, 9 Apr
>2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>>The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>>within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>
>>>>Watch those goalposts move.
>>>
>>>You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>>like with like, please!
>>
>>We were talking about low profile tyres.
>
>On the sort of cars someone might buy instead of a Freelander.

I see SUVs with low profiles quite often. There's some gimp who drives
around in a nissan patrol V8 with tyres that look like rubber bands.

>>A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom.
>
>Why do you need "extra" legroom. There's plenty already.

Larger, more expensive car.

>>But yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>
>The extra visibility of the road is probably better for people who are
>5'6" tall.

Seriously?

In message <t2s0g5$hui$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:08:21 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>>>> The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>>>> within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Watch those goalposts move.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>>>> like with like, please!
>>>>
>>>> We were talking about low profile tyres.
>>>>
>>>>>> Not a pilot, but I wouldn't call a freelander roomy given its
>>>>>>size and weight.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>>>> keep pointing out). That's a normal family car. The Freelander's extra
>>>>> height gives a little more headroom inside (despite the higher floor), I
>>>>> suspect, and greatly improved visibility of the road.
>>>>
>>>> A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom. But
>>>> yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>>>
>>> Actually, less legroom than the Mondeo it was derived from, as it has a
>>> shorter wheelbase.
>>
>> Many taller cars have more effective leg room than the saloons they’re
>> based on, because the seats are higher and the lower leg doesn’t need to be
>> stretched so far to be comfortable.
>
>In theory, yes, but I don't know if that model has a higher seat above the
>floor than the Mondeo 3? Or is the extra height mainly used up by the much
>higher floor?

Mondeo: H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - driver 654mm
H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - passgr 651mm

FL2: H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - driver 717mm
H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - passgr 706mm

I'm assuming they really mean front and back, as the geometry for the
front passenger looks the same as for the driver.

There's other things too, like despite the relatively high floor you can
get an unfolded wheelchair in the back of a Freelander 2 (seats folded),
but not a Mondeo (even an estate, and even with the back seats down).

OK, not everyone has an unfolded wheelchair, but there are other things
about that size, one needs to carry from time to time.
--
Roland Perry

On 09/04/2022 11:59, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:13:07 +0100
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/04/2022 10:12, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 08:11:59 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> We've got diverted down this rathole by the suggestion from someone that
>>>>> white-van-man sometimes buys a Disc, for dual-purpose transport. Not the
>>>>> other way around.
>>>>
>>>> But also simultaneously by Muttley's suggestion that my two non- white van
>>>> man friends, with large families, dog, dodgy country roads, and tow a car
>>>> trailer several times a year, should replace their Disco with a Transit.
>>>
>>> Works for builders and pikeys everywhere. A disco is just a fashion
>> statement,
>>> not a practical vehicle.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Better tell my former bosses then, we had 6 of them.
>
> Job lot deal was it?
>

Allegedly the first batch off the production line.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 09/04/2022 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
> Years ago, when they upgraded parts of the A14 to three lanes each way
> https://goo.gl/maps/LVaThb7zH8gp17h7A I heard a truck driver complaining
> to his friend in a pub that he'd got a ticket there "Well, it*looked*
> like a motorway to me!"

I suspect most van drivers do not realise they have a 60 mph limit on
dual-carriageways!

It took me some time to get confirmation whether the Freelander van had
the 60 mph limit, even most police did not know!

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t2s0g5$hui$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:08:21 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>>>>> The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>>>>> within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Watch those goalposts move.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>>>>> like with like, please!
>>>>>
>>>>> We were talking about low profile tyres.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not a pilot, but I wouldn't call a freelander roomy given its
>>>>>>> size and weight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>>>>> keep pointing out). That's a normal family car. The Freelander's extra
>>>>>> height gives a little more headroom inside (despite the higher floor), I
>>>>>> suspect, and greatly improved visibility of the road.
>>>>>
>>>>> A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom. But
>>>>> yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, less legroom than the Mondeo it was derived from, as it has a
>>>> shorter wheelbase.
>>>
>>> Many taller cars have more effective leg room than the saloons they’re
>>> based on, because the seats are higher and the lower leg doesn’t need to be
>>> stretched so far to be comfortable.
>>
>> In theory, yes, but I don't know if that model has a higher seat above the
>> floor than the Mondeo 3? Or is the extra height mainly used up by the much
>> higher floor?
>
> Mondeo: H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - driver 654mm
> H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - passgr 651mm
>
> FL2: H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - driver 717mm
> H/room when getting in (seat edge to top of door) - passgr 706mm
>
> I'm assuming they really mean front and back, as the geometry for the
> front passenger looks the same as for the driver.

Yes, makes sense.

>
> There's other things too, like despite the relatively high floor you can
> get an unfolded wheelchair in the back of a Freelander 2 (seats folded),
> but not a Mondeo (even an estate, and even with the back seats down).

Yes, the FL2 definitely has a higher roof.

>
> OK, not everyone has an unfolded wheelchair, but there are other things
> about that size, one needs to carry from time to time.

In message <t2sbol$9th$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:20:38 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022, MB
<MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 09/04/2022 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>> Years ago, when they upgraded parts of the A14 to three lanes each way
>> https://goo.gl/maps/LVaThb7zH8gp17h7A I heard a truck driver complaining
>> to his friend in a pub that he'd got a ticket there "Well, it*looked*
>>like a motorway to me!"
>
>I suspect most van drivers do not realise they have a 60 mph limit on dual-
>carriageways!
>
>It took me some time to get confirmation whether the Freelander van had the
>60 mph limit, even most police did not know!

Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?

I'm struggling to see what's different about this one from a normal
Freelander 2, it hasn't been stretched, so perhaps stronger springs
and no rear seats? From the outside it's indistinguishable.

<https://www.parkers.co.uk/vans-pickups/land-rover/freelander/2008-review/>

"The Land Rover Freelander Commercial is a hard-working van with a robust
interior and strong off-road credentials. It's capable of tireless,
round-the-clock load lugging, thanks to its powerful diesel engine, huge
load space and capable four-wheel drive setup.

For workers regularly venturing off the beaten track, the Freelander
Commercial offers a better balance between off-road ability and in-car
comfort than the agricultural Land Rover Defender, which is a more
utilitarian vehicle.

For an off-road vehicle, the Freelander Commercial is surprisingly well-
behaved on tarmac - it feels composed through corners and there's
minimal bodyroll for passengers; it's best at cruising on the motorway
or charging through the mud."

I'll agree with all of that.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t2sbol$9th$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:20:38 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022, MB
> <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>> On 09/04/2022 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> Years ago, when they upgraded parts of the A14 to three lanes each way
>>> https://goo.gl/maps/LVaThb7zH8gp17h7A I heard a truck driver complaining
>>> to his friend in a pub that he'd got a ticket there "Well, it*looked*
>>> like a motorway to me!"
>>
>> I suspect most van drivers do not realise they have a 60 mph limit on dual-
>> carriageways!
>>
>> It took me some time to get confirmation whether the Freelander van had the
>> 60 mph limit, even most police did not know!
>
> Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?
>
> I'm struggling to see what's different about this one from a normal
> Freelander 2, it hasn't been stretched, so perhaps stronger springs
> and no rear seats? From the outside it's indistinguishable.

Yes, firmer rear suspension would make sense, and would be easy to do.

I don't know, but perhaps the van is also higher geared, for a lower top
speed? That would make it a better load lugger.

In message <t2sdum$1kv$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:57:58 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t2sbol$9th$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:20:38 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022, MB
>> <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>>> On 09/04/2022 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> Years ago, when they upgraded parts of the A14 to three lanes each way
>>>> https://goo.gl/maps/LVaThb7zH8gp17h7A I heard a truck driver complaining
>>>> to his friend in a pub that he'd got a ticket there "Well, it*looked*
>>>> like a motorway to me!"
>>>
>>> I suspect most van drivers do not realise they have a 60 mph limit on dual-
>>> carriageways!
>>>
>>> It took me some time to get confirmation whether the Freelander van had the
>>> 60 mph limit, even most police did not know!
>>
>> Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?
>>
>> I'm struggling to see what's different about this one from a normal
>> Freelander 2, it hasn't been stretched, so perhaps stronger springs
>> and no rear seats? From the outside it's indistinguishable.
>
>Yes, firmer rear suspension would make sense, and would be easy to do.
>
>I don't know, but perhaps the van is also higher geared, for a lower top
>speed? That would make it a better load lugger.

It's a dealer-fitted thing, and I don't imagine they can fiddle with the
gears. In any event it has six, which are plenty for hauling the
unmodified FR2 up a 30-degree slope, so I don't see the need.
--
Roland Perry

On 09/04/2022 17:42, Roland Perry wrote:
> Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?

Weight comes into the rules as well. Then being 4WD, it is a
dual-purpose vehicle.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t2sbol$9th$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:20:38 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022, MB
>> <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>>> On 09/04/2022 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> Years ago, when they upgraded parts of the A14 to three lanes each way
>>>> https://goo.gl/maps/LVaThb7zH8gp17h7A I heard a truck driver complaining
>>>> to his friend in a pub that he'd got a ticket there "Well, it*looked*
>>>> like a motorway to me!"
>>>
>>> I suspect most van drivers do not realise they have a 60 mph limit on dual-
>>> carriageways!
>>>
>>> It took me some time to get confirmation whether the Freelander van had the
>>> 60 mph limit, even most police did not know!
>>
>> Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?
>>
>> I'm struggling to see what's different about this one from a normal
>> Freelander 2, it hasn't been stretched, so perhaps stronger springs
>> and no rear seats? From the outside it's indistinguishable.
>
> Yes, firmer rear suspension would make sense, and would be easy to do.
>
> I don't know, but perhaps the van is also higher geared, for a lower top
> speed? That would make it a better load lugger.
>
>

Its not just being car derived that allows small vans to be driven at the
same speed as cars ,weight comes in to it as well.
Over 2 tonnes a car derived van has to obey van limits, that may seem daft
when many large cars exceed that weight but the expectation is that a cars
“cargo” of a few people and a dog or two
will not be as much as could be placed in a vans load bed.
The Freelander Van is above the weight limit so should be driven to the
lower van limits.

GH

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t2sdum$1kv$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:57:58 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t2sbol$9th$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:20:38 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022, MB
>>> <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>>>> On 09/04/2022 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> Years ago, when they upgraded parts of the A14 to three lanes each way
>>>>> https://goo.gl/maps/LVaThb7zH8gp17h7A I heard a truck driver complaining
>>>>> to his friend in a pub that he'd got a ticket there "Well, it*looked*
>>>>> like a motorway to me!"
>>>>
>>>> I suspect most van drivers do not realise they have a 60 mph limit on dual-
>>>> carriageways!
>>>>
>>>> It took me some time to get confirmation whether the Freelander van had the
>>>> 60 mph limit, even most police did not know!
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?
>>>
>>> I'm struggling to see what's different about this one from a normal
>>> Freelander 2, it hasn't been stretched, so perhaps stronger springs
>>> and no rear seats? From the outside it's indistinguishable.
>>
>> Yes, firmer rear suspension would make sense, and would be easy to do.
>>
>> I don't know, but perhaps the van is also higher geared, for a lower top
>> speed? That would make it a better load lugger.
>
> It's a dealer-fitted thing, and I don't imagine they can fiddle with the
> gears. In any event it has six, which are plenty for hauling the
> unmodified FR2 up a 30-degree slope, so I don't see the need.

That reminds me of the rules in Denmark. It's a country with no indigenous
car manufacturing, and hence no motor industry lobby, so the government
tries to discourage private car usage, preferring that its citizens cycle
or use public transport instead. It therefore imposes a penal registration
tax of up to 150% of the car's value. But it doesn't want to penalise
business buyers, and doesn't impose the tax on commercial vehicles.

But how do they stop commercial vehicles from being used as tax-free
company cars? They have a special category of commercial vans that can
also be used privately, which attract a mere 50% registration tax. These
'vans' must have no back seats, and a cargo barrier between the front seats
and 'load area', and they have green number plates so they can be spotted
if being used as normal cars.

The huge registration tax difference nevertheless means many expensive,
prestige cars are sold as green number plate 'vans'. I assume the easy van
conversion is done by the dealer before the sale, and means you see things
like shiny new Porsche Cayenne or Range Rover green number plate vans. I
think that after three(?) years they can be converted back to passenger
cars by replacing the back seats with low or no tax penalty.

The tax difference also creates an unusual export opportunity: because of
the very high registration tax, manufacturers lower their base prices to
minimise the sales barrier in Denmark. But these cut-price cars can be
exported tax-free from Denmark, used abroad for three(?) years, and then
re-imported without incurring the tax.

In message <jbdur9F8dlkU1@mid.individual.net>, at 17:42:01 on Sat, 9 Apr
2022, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t2sbol$9th$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:20:38 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022, MB
>>> <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>>>> On 09/04/2022 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> Years ago, when they upgraded parts of the A14 to three lanes each way
>>>>> https://goo.gl/maps/LVaThb7zH8gp17h7A I heard a truck driver complaining
>>>>> to his friend in a pub that he'd got a ticket there "Well, it*looked*
>>>>> like a motorway to me!"
>>>>
>>>> I suspect most van drivers do not realise they have a 60 mph limit on dual-
>>>> carriageways!
>>>>
>>>> It took me some time to get confirmation whether the Freelander van had the
>>>> 60 mph limit, even most police did not know!
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?
>>>
>>> I'm struggling to see what's different about this one from a normal
>>> Freelander 2, it hasn't been stretched, so perhaps stronger springs
>>> and no rear seats? From the outside it's indistinguishable.
>>
>> Yes, firmer rear suspension would make sense, and would be easy to do.
>>
>> I don't know, but perhaps the van is also higher geared, for a lower top
>> speed? That would make it a better load lugger.
>
>Its not just being car derived that allows small vans to be driven at the
>same speed as cars ,weight comes in to it as well.
>Over 2 tonnes a car derived van has to obey van limits, that may seem daft
>when many large cars exceed that weight but the expectation is that a cars
>“cargo” of a few people and a dog or two
>will not be as much as could be placed in a vans load bed.
>The Freelander Van is above the weight limit

Freelander 1: 2040 to 2080 depending on engine, don't have a figure for
the van. Freelander 2 in the region of 2500.

>so should be driven to the lower van limits.

And I now see that the V5 should say "CDV".

--
Roland Perry

In message <t2sfl3$f1c$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:27:00 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 09/04/2022 17:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be a slam-dunk for a "car derivative"?
>
>Weight comes into the rules as well. Then being 4WD, it is a
>dual-purpose vehicle.

Does being a "dual purpose vehicle" help or hinder in this context?
--
Roland Perry

In message <t2rsee$huh$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:59:10 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>>> It's basically the same floorpan as a Mondeo (and recliner is wont to
>>>> keep pointing out). That's a normal family car.
>>>
>>> Yes, it was based on the third generation Mondeo platform (as was the
>>> Jaguar X-Type and Volvo S80). However, they didn't the floor pan or
>>> wheelbase, and the FL2 had a shorter wheelbase and thus less legroom than
>>> the Mondeo, 2659 vs 2754mm. It was also much shorter, at 4501 vs 4731mm.
>>
>> Legroom is not inextricably tied to the wheelbase or length. Any
>> half-decent engineer could tell you that.
>
>Yes, but decent engineers know that it is.

Repeating something doesn't make it true. Legroom depends on many
things, not least how far the back seats are from the rear of the car.
There's a modern trend for example to make small family cars where the
boot is only about 1ft front to back, which increases the rear legroom
compared to an older designs of that overall length with a bigger boot.

Then there's the length of the bonnet, and the Mondeo's is considerable,
but I'd have to measure one to compare it with the FL2.

>>> So the FL2 was a shortened, less roomy, thirstier 3rd generation Mondeo on
>>> stilts.
>>
>> Which is better off-road, or in slippery conditions, and better load
>> carrying capacity, than either of those.
>
>It would certainly be better off-road, but I doubt that it would have
>better load carrying capacity than the much longer, more spacious Mondeo.

I've posted some numbers that show you can get bulkier loads in the FL2
(although frankly I'd have thought that blindingly obvious). As for
weight, The Mondeo's load carrying capability (which usually has to be
derived from GVW minus kerb weight) is around 540kg depending on model.

The FL2 it's around 730kg (again depending on exact configuration).

By comparison, the EU rules for calculating average weights of
passengers and carry-on luggage is 515kg for five people.

>My favourite Ford from that era was the Jaguar XJ Sovereign, which I bought
>from new. The Freelander wouldn't have got on my longest long list of cars
>to consider.

We are quits then, because that car wouldn't have made my list either.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t2rou5$o3o$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:59:17 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <s3sl4hljej58eag05rsmpqotg5rbum0ie7@4ax.com>, at 14:22:13 on
>> Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> A new motorised door mirror is about £150, a broken computer is often
>>>>>> unfixable.
>>>>>
>>>>> It won't be a separate computer, just one of the many functions of the
>>>>> main computers.
>>>>
>>>> Cars have dozens of computers, that's part of the problem.
>>>
>>> You'll just have stick with ancient cars if you don't want cars with
>>> lost of computers in them.
>>
>> This headlong rush for "new and shiny" despite the reduced reliability,
>> and escalating maintenance costs is indeed most unfortunate.
>>
>> Of my fleet of cars over the last twenty years, *three* have become
>> beyond economic repair because one simple sensor has died, and if even
>> they are sold separately (not usually) they are a nightmare to replace.
>>
>>>>> The camera strut should be much cheaper to replace than a modern door
>>>>> mirror, with its several motors, indicators, heater, dimmer, puddle
>>>>> light, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Any idea of the price, I gave you mine. With any luck you'd have to
>>>> "register" it with the computer, with only a main dealer having the
>>>> codes.
>>>
>>> Here's an example: £110
>>> <https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/294524034141>
>>
>> And how much to fit and "register" with the computer?
>
>Probably no need, if it's sold on eBay. Why would a simple camera need
>that?

It's the sort of thing that happens these days.

>>> As opposed to £1000 for a physical power mirror unit:
>>> <https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/265212678037>
>>
>> It's possible to prove almost anything by cherry-picking eBay listings.
>> I told you how much the power mirror on a Freelander 2 typically costs.
>>
>> Of course, that's a brand new whole one, cheaper for just the glass, or
>> the case, or pre-owned. And can be DIY fitted.
>
>Yes, but that's a simple mirror from an old car.
>Does it have de-misting?
>Does it have auto-dimming?
>And auto-dipping for reversal?
>Or puddle lights?
>What about auto-folding?
>Does it include indicators?

It has everything required for normal use: demisting, electric folding,
and of course adjustments.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t2s93n$pah$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:35:19 on Sat, 9 Apr
2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 16:06:13 +0100
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <t2rp54$1gb1$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 11:03:00 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 11:17:26 +0100
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>In message <t2rijs$m48$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:11:24 on Sat, 9 Apr
>>>>>>The majority of cars are about the size of a Fiesta, so aren't really
>>>>>>within the scope of this discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>>Watch those goalposts move.
>>>>
>>>>You are the one insisting on roomy cars with lots of legroom, so compare
>>>>like with like, please!
>>>
>>>We were talking about low profile tyres.
>>
>>On the sort of cars someone might buy instead of a Freelander.
>
>I see SUVs with low profiles quite often. There's some gimp who drives
>around in a nissan patrol V8 with tyres that look like rubber bands.

You keep changing the subject; impossible to keep up.

>>>A foot higher, probably 1/4 to half a ton heavier and no extra legroom.
>>
>>Why do you need "extra" legroom. There's plenty already.
>
>Larger, more expensive car.

What is, one I need, or one you'd prefer.

>>>But yeah, if you're 6'9 then I'm sure that extra height is useful.
>>
>>The extra visibility of the road is probably better for people who are
>>5'6" tall.
>
>Seriously?

Yes, visibility is far better in something like a Freelander (or Range
Rover or classic Discovery) than a regular saloon car. Have you even
driven one?
--
Roland Perry

In message <t2s63u$1bdi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 14:44:15 on Sat, 9 Apr
2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 12:36:00 +0100
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <t2rppn$ufl$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:13:59 on Sat, 9 Apr 2022,
>>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>>So the FL2 was a shortened, less roomy, thirstier 3rd generation Mondeo on
>>>stilts.
>>
>>Which is better off-road, or in slippery conditions, and better load
>>carrying capacity, than either of those. Why do you project so much FL2
>>envy?
>
>Just how often do you use your SUV offroad? I don't mean a country track with
>a few potholes that any car beside a ferrari or lambo could navigate without
>any issues,

There's plenty of unmade rounds round here which don't meet that
description.

>I mean genuinely offroad that requires 4wd with proper off road
>tyres.

There's an excluded middle there, which includes conditions such as snow
and floods, and sloping grass verges that I wouldn't normally want to
drive a family car along.

Also bear in mind I need the load carrying capability, and there's very
few non-SUVs which are suitable. My previous car was a Mercedes B-Class
(one of the older variety) but it had ridiculously low ground clearance.
--
Roland Perry